Double-blind controlled trial of oral clodronate in patients with bone metastases from breast cancer.

1993 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
A H Paterson ◽  
T J Powles ◽  
J A Kanis ◽  
E McCloskey ◽  
J Hanson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Bone Pain ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Recurrent Breast Cancer ◽  
Nonvertebral Fracture ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Oral Clodronate

PURPOSE Osteolytic metastases often give rise to hypercalcemia, fracture, and bone pain, and occur commonly in patients with recurrent breast cancer. We assessed the bisphosphonate, clodronate, which has proven to be a useful treatment for hypercalcemia and may be a potent inhibitor of tumor-induced osteolysis, for its effect on reducing the osseous complications of metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS We studied 173 patients with bone metastases due to breast cancer in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of oral clodronate 1,600 mg/d (85 patients) compared with an identical placebo (88 patients). RESULTS The patients in each wing were comparable in their clinical, radiologic, and biochemical characteristics at trial entry. In patients who received clodronate, there was a significant reduction compared with placebo in the total number of hypercalcemic episodes (28 v 52; P < .01), in the number of terminal hypercalcemic episodes (seven v 17; P < .05), in the incidence of vertebral fractures (84 v 124 per 100 patient-years; P < .025), and in the rate of vertebral deformity (168 v 252 per 100 patient-years; P < .001). The combined rate of all morbid skeletal events was significantly reduced (218.6 v 304.8 per 100 patient-years; P < .001). Trends were seen in favor of clodronate for nonvertebral fracture rates and radiotherapy requirements for bone pain (particularly spinal pain). No significant survival differences and no significant differences in side effects were observed between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS These findings indicate that oral clodronate has a beneficial effect on the skeletal morbidity associated with breast cancer and should be considered as antiosteolytic therapy in affected patients. It deserves further investigation as an adjuvant therapy in operable breast cancer and in patients with nonosseous recurrence who are at high risk for bone metastases.

Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Clodronate in Patients With Primary Operable Breast Cancer

2002 ◽  
Vol 20 (15) ◽  
pp. 3219-3224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trevor Powles ◽  
Sandy Paterson ◽  
John A. Kanis ◽  
Eugene McCloskey ◽  
Sue Ashley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Bone Metastases ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Multicenter Trial ◽  
Primary Treatment ◽  
Operable Breast Cancer ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Intent To Treat ◽  
Primary Operable Breast Cancer

PURPOSE: The development of bone metastases depends on tumor-induced osteoclastic resorption of bone, which may be inhibited by the antiosteolytic bisphosphonate clodronate. Given to patients with primary breast cancer, clodronate might reduce the subsequent incidence of bone metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This double-blind, multicenter trial accrued 1,069 assessable patients with operable breast cancer between 1989 and 1995. All patients received surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and tamoxifen as required. Patients were randomized to receive oral clodronate 1,600 mg/d or a placebo for 2 years starting within 6 months of primary treatment. The primary end point was relapse in bone, analyzed on an intent-to-treat basis, during the medication period and during the total follow-up period (median follow-up, 2,007 days). Secondary end points were relapse in other sites, mortality, and toxicity. RESULTS: During the total follow-up period, there was a nonsignificant reduction in occurrence of bone metastases (clodronate, n = 63; placebo, n = 80; hazards ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 1.08; P = .127). During the medication period there was a significant reduction in the occurrence of bone metastases (clodronate, n = 12; placebo, n = 28; HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.86; P = .016). The occurrence of nonosseous metastases was similar (clodronate, n = 112; placebo, n = 128; P = .257), but there was a significant reduction in mortality (clodronate, n = 98; placebo, n = 129; P = .047) during the total follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Clodronate, given to patients with primary operable breast cancer, may reduce the occurrence of bone metastases, although this reduction was only significant during this medication period. There was a significant reduction in mortality.

Can adjuvant homeopathy improve the control of post-chemotherapy emesis in breast cancer patients? Results of a randomized placebo-controlled trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e20566-e20566
Author(s):  
I. L. Ray-Coquard ◽  
J. Provençal ◽  
A. C. Hardy-Bessard ◽  
T. Bachelot ◽  
D. Coeffic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Tac Chemotherapy

e20566 Background: Homeopathy used as an adjunct in the treatment of chemotherapy (CT)-induced emesis has rarely been evaluated. Methods: Patients with non-metastatic breast cancer treated with 6 courses of FAC 50, FEC 100 or TAC chemotherapy were randomized to Cocculus/nux vomica/tabacum/petroleum extract (Cocculine, C) or Placebo (P) in a multicentric comparative double-blind phase III study. Anti-emetic treatment was standardized (corticoids + ondansetron). Patients were evaluated after each course. The primary endpoint was nausea measured after the 1st CT course using the FLIE (Functional Living Index for Emesis) with 5-day recall. The planned sample size was 396 evaluable patients based on a minimum expected difference in mean of 0.5 ± 1.6 on a scale from 1 (a lot) to 7 (not at all) with 5% two-sided α error and 85% power. An intent-to-treat analysis was planned. Secondary evaluation criteria were: vomiting measured by the FLIE score, patient self-evaluation (EVA) and investigator recording (NCI-CTC) of nausea and vomiting intensities, and compliance. Results: From September 05 to January 08, 431 patients were randomized (217 to P and 214 to C). Patient characteristics were well balanced between groups. Median age was 53 years, 35% of the patients experienced nausea or vomiting. In total, 403 patients (93.5%) were assessable for the primary endpoint, with few nausea episodes (FLIE nausea scores after the 1st CT course were 6.02 and 6.07 for P and C, respectively) and very good compliance (81% patients complied with the protocol). Adverse events related to nausea occurred in 51% vs. 47% of the patients treated with P and C, respectively (p = 0.48). FLIE and NCI-CTC vomiting scores were similar between the 2 arms (6.91 vs. 6.88, p = 0.47, and 20% vs. 21%, p = 0.73, for P and C, respectively). Grade II-III nausea occurred in 17.6% and 15.7% of patients receiving P and C (p = 0.62). Conclusions: No benefit of homeopathy over standard treatment was noted in this study. But surprisingly we observed lower rates of nausea and vomiting measured by patients and by investigators, than in other studies using identical chemotherapy regimens. The observation and management of emesis could modify the perception and rate of such adverse events. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document